Skip to main content

About your Search

20120929
20121007
Search Results 0 to 14 of about 15 (some duplicates have been removed)
stevens and three other americans were killed in the september 11th attack in benghazi and molly henneberg is following the story live in washington what happens next. >> she has her supporters including the president saying she's done extraordinary work at the united nations and providing the best knowledge that the administration had at the time. and john kerry, democratic chairman of the foreign relations committee says she's a quote enormously capable person, but republican congressman peter king is it not convinced. he wants to know why five days after the attack that killed ambassador chris stevens and three others, ambassador rice stated publicly on several talk shows it was a spontaneous attack that grew out of an anti-muslim video when there was evidence it was a coordinated terror attack. >> ambassador rice should resign and we should investigate how high up this went and if the administration would voluntarily come forward and why they gave out this false information when they had to know there was so much else out there and yet, they wanted to rule out terrorism from the start.
a lot of hot button issues. >> yeah. the most recently retired justices were john paul stevens went out at 90. david souter 69, sandra day o'connor 75. is there a tradition of when justices usually retire, be it age, or time served? >> well, they're like most human beings. a lot of factors weigh in. there is -- there was a tradition where justices would tend to retire during the term of a president that was at the same party that appointed them. but we know neither justices souter nor stevens did that. they were both republican employees and went out during president obama's term. life circumstances can drive retirement decisions. so it's really not scientifically predictable or politically predictable. >> do you see any most likely candidates if another seat opens up under president obama? >> you know, i think if president obama, first of all, justice ruth bader ginsburg i think the pressure to replace her with another woman appointee would be enormous. we've made progress in getting a third of the court female and i don't think president obama or any president would want to go backwar
including ambassador chris stevens. it a violent end to a spontaneous protest over an anti-muslim film. but an investigation found c evidence to the contrary. >>> criticism from republicans over the initial response. now, one high-ranking republican wants u.s. ambassador to the united nations susan rice to step down. new york congressman peter king says rice is to be held account aable for her statements on the attack. here's what he told our wolf blitzer. >> i believe this was such a failure of foreign policy message and leadership. such a misstatement of the facts as known at the time and for her to go on all those showers and be misinforming the american people and our allies and countries around the world, to me, somebody has to pay the price first. we have so much things to go wrong and everyveryone forgets t it the next day. an american ambassador who was killed where by all the accumulation of evidence at the time the prezusumption had to b it was terrorism. it is definitivety terrorism, to say it was not terrorism at that time was a, to me, terrible mistake to make, whether it
three justices to leave, o'connor, suitor, stevens, all moderate republicans, they are gone. they have either gone to the democrat, suitor and stevens gave their seats to obama. the republicans who have been appoi appointed, john roberts reflect the modern republican party. mitt romney, to be sure, would nominate someone like cavanagh, a young judge on the d.c. circuit. very conservative. not moderate republicans. that's why one seat would make such a difference. >> and those two have very clear records as did john roberts and sam aledo. we knew exactly who they were and what they would do. the senate wasn't ready to really look at that record and make an issue. >> can i ask a theoretical question. there's two ways of thinking about this. there should be a deference to the executive in naming nominees that comport with the president's legal philosophy, ideolo ideology. applying confidence because they are qualified for the job and hey, this is politics and a woman's right to choose on the line, this is a war against all against all. do what it takes. which is your belief system? >> you
that ambassador stevens and the others were killed because of the security at the compound? >> i think you have to say there is a direct link. but when you are cutting the security, why whereelse aren't we able to fund the measures? but, no. ic another legitimate issue is, how much has al qaeda become innerwoven within the hour of spring? this is a legitimate issue for both candidates. have that changed and attacking us here on the homeland toet if our consulates overseas? if so, how much has congress and the united states administration come together to fund adequately all of our worries and state departments throughout the global environment of the world? >> brad, if there was the shift by al qaeda, should the administration have come out with what they said that it was a dopey movie? >> eric tfit their narrative at the time. they wanted the world to believe and americans to believe that the youtube video was the causation for the attack in libya. we know that that is false. what is worse, and the admiral is right, al qaeda is interwoven throughout the arab spring in numerous countries. but w
.s. ambassador chris stevens and three others their lives. former secretary of defense donald rumsfeld joins us to discuss these latest develops later this hour. stay tuned for that. ♪ >> if you like your doctor, you will be able to keep your doctor. period. if you like your health care plan, you will be able to keep your health care plan. period. no one will take it away, no matter what. alisyn: well, new questions today about that now-famous promise from the president. two major american employers have announced what some call a, quote, radical change in how they provide health benefits to their workers. sears holdings corp. and dorden restaurants which owns chains like red lobster and olive garden are now dropping company-sponsored health care coverage, and instead they're giving employers a fixed sum of money allowing them to choose their own medical coverage. so let's debate this. steve moore, senior economics writer for "the wall street journal", dr -- [inaudible] ceo of vital springs technologies and author of "get off the dime: the secret of changing who pays for your health care." an
stevens and three other americans were killed in that attack. cnn intelligence correspondent suzanne kelly joins me live from washington. did intelligence agencies really not have enough formation, or were they covering up parts, as some are suggesting? >> that's a great question, and i think what we're starting to see now is a little bit behind the curtain, if you will, with the intelligence community coming out with this very unusual statement really about what it knew. although it's not nailing down exactly the timeline. now, you have to remember in those first 24 hours after this attack, things were coming in, they were initial assessments and the intelligence community is basically saying look, guys, we know that initial assessments are sometimes wrong because you just haven't gathered enough information yet. but let me read to you what shawn turner said. he's the director of communications for the office of the director of national intelligence, the president's top intelligence adviser here. as we learn more about the attack, we revised our initial assessment to reflect new informati
a question here? way, way in the back, is there a microphone in that last row there? >> steven call, university of maryland. is it important for the united states to abide by international law and liberal international order and is there a way the united states could use military force against iran's nuclear program without u.n. approval and be in compliance with international law? >> who wants to take that? want to take it. >> i will take it but don't want to be droning on and on. >> then speak briefly. >> i will speak briefly. the united states, first of all, you know you can go through a lot of presidents going back to including bill clinton obviously who took military action in kosovo in that case without a u.n. security council mandate and, barack obama ran and says repeatedly that he does not consider the united states bound by to pursue its interests bound by u.n. security council resolutions. merge has i would say am by lept attitude toward international law. we are in some respects the greatest spokesman sometimes for international law but throughout our history and through
to come to these things. you took a murky topic and made it clear. as the attorney of steven colbert, will he use that money to try to win the emmy from jon stewart? my real question is -- it is difficult to change. this is a time when things are so polarized. with new technology where everybody has their own axe to grind, address that as a dissuading factor. if i go home tonight, i can do whatever i want to as many people as i can reach. that is different from the time of jefferson. ben franklin are someone only needed to set that in print and now all you need to is to press a button. how does that fit into a campaign? >> obama cannot raise the money without technology. the net is different from a newspaper. you can say whatever you want an infinite number of people can read that. no one will know you wrote that unless you put money behind it or have a way of promoting it. there are similar barriers. you cannot say you're printing press is as important as someone else's printing press. it is more complicated. >> question surprised me. going to say we took a simple subject and made
Search Results 0 to 14 of about 15 (some duplicates have been removed)